hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Oleg Kalnichevski (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (HTTPCLIENT-416) Consider replacing commons-logging by SLF4J
Date Sat, 03 Jun 2006 11:53:30 GMT
    [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCLIENT-416?page=comments#action_12414571 ] 

Oleg Kalnichevski commented on HTTPCLIENT-416:

Commons Logging is being actively developed and supported. As far as I know (I may well be
wrong though) Commons Logging 2.0 is going to be in many ways similar to SLF4J. At the moment
I personally lean toward sticking to Commons Logging


> Consider replacing commons-logging by SLF4J
> -------------------------------------------
>          Key: HTTPCLIENT-416
>          URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCLIENT-416
>      Project: Jakarta HttpClient
>         Type: Improvement

>   Components: HttpClient
>     Versions: 3.0 Beta 1
>  Environment: Operating System: Windows 2000
> Platform: PC
>     Reporter: Ortwin Gl├╝ck
>     Assignee: HttpClient Dev
>     Priority: Minor
>      Fix For: 4.0 Alpha 1
>  Attachments: commons-logging-to-log4j.xml
> As soon as Log4J 1.3 is available a move to UGLI is possible.
> This would improve Log performance with Log4J and render cleaner logging code at
> the same time.
> Ceki writes:
> Since the org.apache.log4j.Logger class is a direct implementation of
> org.apache.ugli.ULogger interface, there is no need to wrap a log4j
> Logger to conform to the UGLI interface. Log4j Loggers are already
> ULoggers. It follows that the objects returned by
> o.a.ugli.LoggerFactory.getLogger("x") are identical to those returned
> by o.a.log4j.Logger.getLogger("x").
> Thus, using UGLI in conjunction with log4j will not carry any overhead
> whatsoever.
> As noted in my previous message, UGLI also supports parameterized log
> messages obliterating the need to surround log messages with
> logger.isXXXEnabled checks.
> Instead of writing:
>   if(logger.isDebugEnabled()) {
>     logger.debug("User with "+id+" entered wrong query string ["+query"]." );
>   }
> you can just write:
>   logger.debug("User with {} entered wrong query string [{}].", id, query);
> Give or take a nano-second, when the log statement is disabled, both
> forms perform equally well but the second form is easier to read and
> to write.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
For more information on JIRA, see:

To unsubscribe, e-mail: httpclient-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: httpclient-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org

View raw message